Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

LVorenus2020 t1_jaq3r79 wrote

Faster than the 1976-77 Canadiens?

Unreal. They'd better be passing that Cup 'round in the spring!

Otherwise, they set themselves up for a colossal collapse 'n choke, with all the sad, rage-filled months which follow.

136

KyurMeTV t1_jaquhgy wrote

Do you even hockey? /s

But seriously, if history repeats, they’ll go down in round 1 or 2. Most presidents cup teams don’t make it to the Stanley Cup, it’s what love about the sport; it’s truly anyone’s game.

81

L3thal_Inj3ction t1_jargvng wrote

The east is also a bloodbath this year, could definitely see them getting beat up even if they make the finals

27

FriedEggScrambled t1_jb6jrtn wrote

The WC might have an easier path with less bodily damage with how the EC is playing out. Wouldn’t be surprised to see the WC take home the cup this season.

1

canuck47 t1_jar2owo wrote

As a Leafs fan, I hope you're right...

9

Mediocremon t1_jar3quw wrote

As a Wings fan, lol look a Leafs fan!

22

canuck47 t1_jasmgfj wrote

As a Wings fan, you don't have to concern yourself about the playoffs this season 😉

9

Mediocremon t1_jasn1zr wrote

Exactly. Think about all the free time I'll have to make fun of the Leafs with!

6

canuck47 t1_jat2fum wrote

They can think up of some real zingers while they're playing golf 🏌️‍♀️

3

Duckboy_Flaccidpus t1_jasttrv wrote

They are so frickin solid though. They'd have to really shit the bed to not make it into the finals.

1

cliffx t1_jara8x9 wrote

The Bruins have 5 OTL bonus points so it's not a true comparison to earlier teams.

Without them they'd be at 96 points - which is still a great year.

22

erv4 t1_jaricnv wrote

3 of those losses are SO, so they would have got one point for a tie and would be at 99 pts. They could lose in a SO or win the next game to tie or pass Montreal.

20

WolfpackConsultant t1_jasm02k wrote

All 5 of their overtime losses, whether shootout or not, already give them 1 point. The 1 point for a tie was never taken away is just now the otl column in the standings

4

gearmaro1 t1_jarflwj wrote

If we’re counting out OTL points, should we also count out OT wins? Since there used to be 1 point for a tie at the end if regulation.

8

cliffx t1_jargyxv wrote

They used to be counted separately, but no difference really.

Both OT and regular wins are worth the same 2 points, so they all go into the win column.

So for games that go to OT there are 3 points awarded, 2 to the winner and 1 to the loser. When comparing teams from different era's the point totals no longer compare apples to apples.

3

MathMaddox t1_jarhtpo wrote

They need to get rid of the loser point. If you lose you lose.

Edit: I know that is the opposite of your point, just saying.

3

cliffx t1_jarkjj4 wrote

Agree, get rid of the loser point, or make a win worth 3 points.

Having some games be worth 3 points in the standings and others worth only 2 is bull.

7

MathMaddox t1_jarkxnr wrote

I want to take it step further. No more shootouts, 10min 3v3 and NO points for a tie.

8

garrettj100 t1_jaswkld wrote

I’ll do you one better:

One team enjoys a 1-man advantage during a 6:30 overtime period, 5-4, the whole time. Only catch is the team down a man enjoys tie odds. If the period ends in a tie they win. No more ties ever. No zero-point games where nobody wins. And with 3:00 left in the last OT period one team is going to pull the goalie and play 6-on-4.

Also: WHY IS GOMORRA?

1

MathMaddox t1_jat9heu wrote

Too complicated for me. 3v3 for 10mins and a massive penalty for playing it safe (no points) should end most games.

Also none of this BS of playing for a point late in the season or teams not being able to catch up after their rival lost four straight but got 3 loser points.

2

jamesa7171 t1_jazbc58 wrote

Was this inspired by Armageddon in chess? (a type of tiebreaker game in tournaments where one side is given a significant advantage, but the other side can draw to win)

1

garrettj100 t1_jazix10 wrote

Yes. I follow chess as well. I suggested this to TangoTiger on twitter a few years ago, and he came up with the number of ~6:00 (I've since deleted Twitter), which is roughly the break-even 50% point for the team up a man to score a goal.

Though, Tango also suggested you do a game theory cake-cutting method of choosing the time. One team chooses the time, the other team chooses the side.

1

jamesa7171 t1_jazmy8j wrote

That game theory suggestion was recently proposed officially by the Baltimore Ravens as a way to fix the NFL's sudden death OT problem there (with the opening OT kickoff abandoned, and the starting yard line for the offense being the cake-cutting choice).

I love that kind of idea on a philosophical level, but it seems like it would get analytically solved quite quickly, and after a certain point it would just represent extra formalities to go through before starting OT (compared to just legislating the time).

1

garrettj100 t1_jazntbg wrote

Yeah, I could do without games that aren't the game we're watching as well. Once I heard someone suggest choosing to challenge a call was a game-within-a-game.

That's true. A sucky boring game within a game that's barely more interesting than "What number am I thinking of?"

2

garrettj100 t1_jazny4f wrote

> That game theory suggestion was recently proposed officially by the Baltimore Ravens as a way to fix the NFL's sudden death OT problem there (with the opening OT kickoff abandoned, and the starting yard line for the offense being the cake-cutting choice)

There's just one problem with that proposal: The Chiefs (and possibly others) would offer up the 1-inch line.

1

Matrix17 t1_jasszho wrote

History says they'll be a 1st round exit

2

kraftedynasty t1_jasv9p6 wrote

Here is some history. The top 5 teams to make it to 100 points all won the Cup that year.

2

Matrix17 t1_jasvsf4 wrote

Er, plenty of teams make it to 100 points every year

0